Alliance leadership should control the war "opt out" box, not the members

alliance_wars

#63

I agree i would not want my leader to tell me if i can or cannot participate. If im going on vaca then i opt out so my team gets the benefit. But if im there i want to participate. If leaders could do that then all they have to do is check out opposing team, decide there to tough and opt us all out. I would hate that.


split this topic #64

A post was merged into an existing topic: Can I buy a hero?


#65

You can only opt out before the matchmaking. That would stay the same.


#66

We need it changed. As of instead opt out button must be checked by inactive player or member that forgot to before heading on Vacation. That the opt out button should be change to the opt in button. The individual will still have control of his/ hers game. And the inactives will not affect the WAR.


#67

Haven’t the dev’s implemented something already that “weeds out” inactive players? Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for the box not being auto checked initially, but we had a couple people not active in 2 Wars, and by the time I went to kick em (I was trying to give them as much time as possible to do the right thing) matchmaking had already begun and low and behold, they weren’t on the battlefield. TG. I went back and checked their profiles and neither one had been on for 5-11 days. I kicked em both anyway because the time they missed was equivalent to 1/2 the time they were in the alliance and they obviously weren’t as interested as most of our group so, bye. Just asking, in a long winded way, does anyone know what the game considers “inactive” exactly. Is it a # of Titans missed? Wars? Combination…


#68

If you miss two wars (use 0 flags) in a row, you will be automatically opted out of the next one


#69

How about this as an idea: give alliance leaders control of the “insufficient war participation” threshold for causing someone to default to opt out on the next war?

The setting would be something like: if you use fewer than X flags in Y consecutive wars, you default to opted out for the next war.

Really hard-core guilds could set the rule at 6 flags and 1 war (if you ever don’t use all of your flags, you’ll default to opted out for the next war)

Less strict guilds might set the rule at something like 3 flags and 2 wars.

And of course, the current rule of 1 flag and 2 wars would be possible to maintain. That could be the default position unless the alliance leaders changes it.


#70

I have to agree with RabbitSmoker, either you are in to play the game in it’s entirety, or find another game.

This is a team effort.

Look up the definition of the word “Alliance”.

Candy Crush has openings if you want to play a game by yourself.

Nuff said.


#71

I’d like to think that the game is big enough to support both casual and hard core players.

I think the real problem happens when players with different attitudes and commitment levels end up in the same alliance. That’s when people (like the OP) tend to get really frustrated.


#72

I pointed this out in another thread but it has bearing here.

Some of these issues could also benefit from by disconnecting the war chest progression from the opt in interface. Just like the Titan chests. It should be tied to the player independently.

Also, and I should start a new suggestion thread on this one, but how about we make it really simple and set it so you get nothing unless you use all 6 flags?

That would solve the slacker problem right there.

You sign up for war you have to use all your flags during that war or you get nothing.

No more pestering people to use their flags. If they want a war chest they actually have to participate or they just don’t get one.

Add that in with alliance leaders having full control over the opt in and we have ourselves a team oriented battle game ladies and gentlemen.

Sorry but I have zero sympathy for, or interest in coddling people who bail out on their teams


#73

Yep that’s 100 true!


#74

Leaders have all the control they want. Set rules/expectations. Players follow. Boot the ones who dont. Problem solved without adding more features or changing anything


#75

Yes in case someone do not cares bout other hard work , we kick them especially ignorant behavior, do not have commitments at all , just to opted theyself if they can use their flag, but you never know once your dedicated member have a problem ( no one knows) something like they have accident or sick or internet connection, or other reason so they can’t told us for 2 day, we choose the leader can opted them for a while until further information.

But for now we can only accept our lose score and keep them until we know the reason.


#76

Line eliminates that communication issue tho. Simply boot and they can get in touch if/when they want to come back. I’ve done it quite a few times. Send pm explaining situation, boot, then let em back in when they get in touch


#77

Yep, after some bad experience, now my alliance set the requirements . Line it a must , so we almost cut every communication problem.
Yours idea will work 100% if all active alliance have at least one application to communicate and not only depends on games chat.

( Kick or keep, lose some score , still think output will be better for them to gain better war chest loot) but IDK is really big difference loot or just the same.


#78

I think a personal message system would fix a lot of this. Many members don’t even engage in chat and are just there for Titans. The option to take someone out of WAR would avoid a lot of the chaos and communication gap. It’s the biggest pain in the ars for leaders.


#79

All that policing/pestering magically goes away if leadership can just press a button and they are out of the war.

Boom! Presto!

You don’t have to hunt anyone down anymore, they have to hunt you down if they want to be in the war.

It would be like magic and completely shift the efforts and time wasted by being a constant police officer to your alliance.

Players who specifically request to be in war will likely show up for the war. The rest of them can silently hit titans and play candy crush while they ignore the chats.


#80

i would like the wining or losing war points all together, basically if I’m doing 100 points and lose 150 i would like to have the final score (top attackers) -50 ,then i can see clearly who is good or not ,or make some improve in defence…


#81

je partage cette avis ça permettrais de mieux évaluer les possibilités de gagner et de mieux préparer nos équipes


#82

I thought I saw on the forum previously a post suggesting leaders could opt their members out of war. I couldn’t find it when I went to look for it again, but I think it’s an important and good suggestion. I constantly have members say “hey, I’m going to be missing for x# of days” and while all the online leaders and members shout “OPT OUT OF WAR” it’s too late. Now they are on the battlefield and we know they won’t do anything but lose us points. Leaders should be able to opt their members out of war until they log back on. I dont want to just kick a member who told us they were going to be gone.